Is this a Single Responsibility Principle violation?
I’m designing an OO graph library and at the moment I’m trying to figure out the design for a GraphEdge class. I’ve added setters and getters for it’s nodes, direction and weight. This seemes perfectly reasonable.
Is this a Single Responsibility Principle violation?
I’m designing an OO graph library and at the moment I’m trying to figure out the design for a GraphEdge class. I’ve added setters and getters for it’s nodes, direction and weight. This seemes perfectly reasonable.
Help me to understand following points about the strategy pattern, how it relates to open/closed principle
I am learning design patterns. I read this article. Point no. 3 is not clear to me. The writer said that strategy lets you change the guts of an object. But this is a violation of the open-close principle. Am I wrong? If I am wrong, then help me to understand what writer wanted to describe.
Help me to understand following points about the strategy pattern, how it relates to open/closed principle
I am learning design patterns. I read this article. Point no. 3 is not clear to me. The writer said that strategy lets you change the guts of an object. But this is a violation of the open-close principle. Am I wrong? If I am wrong, then help me to understand what writer wanted to describe.
Help me to understand following points about the strategy pattern, how it relates to open/closed principle
I am learning design patterns. I read this article. Point no. 3 is not clear to me. The writer said that strategy lets you change the guts of an object. But this is a violation of the open-close principle. Am I wrong? If I am wrong, then help me to understand what writer wanted to describe.
Help me to understand following points about the strategy pattern, how it relates to open/closed principle
I am learning design patterns. I read this article. Point no. 3 is not clear to me. The writer said that strategy lets you change the guts of an object. But this is a violation of the open-close principle. Am I wrong? If I am wrong, then help me to understand what writer wanted to describe.
Help me to understand following points about the strategy pattern, how it relates to open/closed principle
I am learning design patterns. I read this article. Point no. 3 is not clear to me. The writer said that strategy lets you change the guts of an object. But this is a violation of the open-close principle. Am I wrong? If I am wrong, then help me to understand what writer wanted to describe.
OO – are large classes acceptable? [duplicate]
This question already has answers here: How would you know if you’ve written readable and easily maintainable code? [closed] (19 answers) Closed 11 years ago. Despite many years in IT, I still struggle with OO design. One particular problem I seem to keep ending up with is large classes, often containing many hundreds of lines […]
How to organise OO code [duplicate]
This question already has answers here: using static methods and classes (4 answers) Closed 11 years ago. If you have a method that doesn’t need access to any non public fields, properties or methods where should you put the method ? should it just be a normal method in the class, a static method that […]
How to organise OO code [duplicate]
This question already has answers here: using static methods and classes (4 answers) Closed 11 years ago. If you have a method that doesn’t need access to any non public fields, properties or methods where should you put the method ? should it just be a normal method in the class, a static method that […]